Consciousness

[untermensche]

I see no answer to my question.

You haven't read what DBT presented from experimenters at Max Planck Institute. Its not his problem. Your question has been answered.

Bull.

What is the objective marker for when a conscious decision begins?

 

[fromderinside]

You haven't read what DBT presented from experimenters at Max Planck Institute. Its not his problem. Your question has been answered.

Bull.

What is the objective marker for when a conscious decision begins?

Like I said. Read what he wrote before you go out blasting empty Trump-like sounds.

He says he gave you references. You need to use your intellect to determine whether what he provided is relevant to your question before you go off whining like a little b.... Failing that ether say you don't care or apologize. I recommend an apology for your integrity's sake.

 

[DBT]

If you had read the description of the experiments given by the experimenters in the Max Planck Institute, and others, you would not have to ask a silly question. Besides, anything I say is immediately rejected. Hell, anything anyone says is immediately rejected. And why? Well, because it does not suit your beliefs. So out goes the research. Out goes all evidence. It does not suit Mr Untermensche.

I see no answer to my question.

The answer was right in front of you. You ignore the answer, just as you ignore the research, the researchers and the evidence. All of which goes against your idea of autonomy of consciousness, but supporting brain agency.

 

[DBT]

You haven't read what DBT presented from experimenters at Max Planck Institute. Its not his problem. Your question has been answered.

Bull.

What is the objective marker for when a conscious decision begins?

You obviously haven't understood the nature and implications of the research and the evidence, or else you wouldn't say 'when a conscious decision begins,' it not being consciousness that makes the decision.

It being the brain that processes information unconsciously and some of this information processing activity is being represented in conscious form....after readiness potential. That is why prediction works. The imaging is recording underlying processing activity prior to the subject consciously experiencing the thought to press one button or the other. The researchers predict which button will be chosen before the subject is aware of their decision.

 

[untermensche]

Bull.

What is the objective marker for when a conscious decision begins?

You obviously haven't understood the nature and implications of the research and the evidence, or else you wouldn't say 'when a conscious decision begins,' it not being consciousness that makes the decision.

It being the brain that processes information unconsciously and some of this information processing activity is being represented in conscious form....after readiness potential. That is why prediction works. The imaging is recording underlying processing activity prior to the subject consciously experiencing the thought to press one button or the other. The researchers predict which button will be chosen before the subject is aware of their decision.

You are avoiding this with all your might because it shows the absurdity of your claims.

There is no objective marker for when a conscious decision is made in these experiments.

They all rely on subjective measurement of when a conscious decision is made. A button is pushed by the subject.

These experiments rely on subjective reporting.

Show me a study where a conscious decision is dealt with objectively.

 

[DBT]

Double post.

 

[DBT]

You are avoiding this with all your might because it shows the absurdity of your claims.

Hilarious. There is no evidence for your claim of autonomy of consciousness...and you yourself have said that consciousness is related to brain activity.

There is no objective marker for when a conscious decision is made in these experiments.

The subject presses the chosen button in the instance the decision is felt to be 'consciously made' - which is well after the activity that precedes consciousness of the decision being made. That is the point.

If you have ever taken one of the online reflex tests you should know that there is a minimum time between sensory input, recognition and response. It can never be an instant response time. It must take the brain a certain amount of time to process inputs and represent some of this information in conscious form, hence the time lag of milliseconds after an event.

The same with decision making, first input then propagation and processing, then conscious representation of sensory phenomena and then the conscious experience of making a decision followed by an action....all of which is shaped and formed milliseconds before being represented in conscious form.

You have no idea. You just stick to your own illusionary model of consciousness, something that has no support.

These experiments rely on subjective reporting.

Show me a study where a conscious decision is dealt with objectively.

OMG, don't you think that when a subject presses button A instead of button B that this is an objective report of a decision having been made?

 

[fromderinside]

You obviously haven't understood the nature and implications of the research and the evidence, or else you wouldn't say 'when a conscious decision begins,' it not being consciousness that makes the decision.

It being the brain that processes information unconsciously and some of this information processing activity is being represented in conscious form....after readiness potential. That is why prediction works. The imaging is recording underlying processing activity prior to the subject consciously experiencing the thought to press one button or the other. The researchers predict which button will be chosen before the subject is aware of their decision.

You are avoiding this with all your might because it shows the absurdity of your claims.

There is no objective marker for when a conscious decision is made in these experiments.

They all rely on subjective measurement of when a conscious decision is made. A button is pushed by the subject.

These experiments rely on subjective reporting.

Show me a study where a conscious decision is dealt with objectively.

Here's more on intention brain activity.

Predicting free choices for abstract intentions https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3625266/

[FONT=&quot]Unconscious neural activity has been repeatedly shown to precede and potentially even influence subsequent free decisions. However, to date, such findings have been mostly restricted to simple motor choices, and despite considerable debate, there is no evidence that the outcome of more complex free decisions can be predicted from prior brain signals. Here, we show that the outcome of a free decision to either add or subtract numbers can already be decoded from neural activity in medial prefrontal and parietal cortex 4 s before the participant reports they are consciously making their choice. These choice-predictive signals co-occurred with the so-called default mode brain activity pattern that was still dominant at the time when the choice-predictive signals occurred. Our results suggest that unconscious preparation of free choices is not restricted to motor preparation. Instead, decisions at multiple scales of abstraction evolve from the dynamics of preceding brain activity.[/FONT]

Supporting material: http://file:///C:/Users/kendrick n williams/Downloads/1212218110_pnas.201212218SI.pdf

Oh squish that little bauble.

 

[untermensche]

You are avoiding this with all your might because it shows the absurdity of your claims.

There is no objective marker for when a conscious decision is made in these experiments.

They all rely on subjective measurement of when a conscious decision is made. A button is pushed by the subject.

These experiments rely on subjective reporting.

Show me a study where a conscious decision is dealt with objectively.

Here's more on intention brain activity.

Predicting free choices for abstract intentions https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3625266/

[FONT="]Unconscious neural activity has been repeatedly shown to precede and potentially even influence subsequent free decisions. However, to date, such findings have been mostly restricted to simple motor choices, and despite considerable debate, there is no evidence that the outcome of more complex free decisions can be predicted from prior brain signals. Here, we show that the outcome of a free decision to either add or subtract numbers can already be decoded from neural activity in medial prefrontal and parietal cortex 4 s before the participant reports they are consciously making their choice. These choice-predictive signals co-occurred with the so-called default mode brain activity pattern that was still dominant at the time when the choice-predictive signals occurred. Our results suggest that unconscious preparation of free choices is not restricted to motor preparation. Instead, decisions at multiple scales of abstraction evolve from the dynamics of preceding brain activity.[/FONT]

Supporting material: http://file:///C:/Users/kendrick n williams/Downloads/1212218110_pnas.201212218SI.pdf

Oh squish that little bauble.

You don't know the difference between something that correlates to a conscious decision and the actual decision.

 

[DBT]

Here's more on intention brain activity.

Predicting free choices for abstract intentions https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3625266/

[FONT="]Unconscious neural activity has been repeatedly shown to precede and potentially even influence subsequent free decisions. However, to date, such findings have been mostly restricted to simple motor choices, and despite considerable debate, there is no evidence that the outcome of more complex free decisions can be predicted from prior brain signals. Here, we show that the outcome of a free decision to either add or subtract numbers can already be decoded from neural activity in medial prefrontal and parietal cortex 4 s before the participant reports they are consciously making their choice. These choice-predictive signals co-occurred with the so-called default mode brain activity pattern that was still dominant at the time when the choice-predictive signals occurred. Our results suggest that unconscious preparation of free choices is not restricted to motor preparation. Instead, decisions at multiple scales of abstraction evolve from the dynamics of preceding brain activity.[/FONT]

Supporting material: http://file:///C:/Users/kendrick n williams/Downloads/1212218110_pnas.201212218SI.pdf

Oh squish that little bauble.

You don't know the difference between something that correlates to a conscious decision and the actual decision.

Nonsense. We are not talking about magic. It is the nature and location of the prior processing that feeds into conscious activity. It's just physics. Sight, for example, can't precede information input via the eyes, processing/visual lobe, integration with memory enabling recognition, etc. It all works on the same principle, thought cannot precede input, actions cannot precede the diver of action and so on. Your notion of autonomous consciousness is absurd on every level.

 

[fromderinside]

I believe Karakov started a sister thread apropos for educating untermenche here.

 

[untermensche]

There is no objective marker for when a conscious decision is made in these experiments.

The subject presses the chosen button in the instance the decision is felt to be 'consciously made'...

In case you don't understand.

This is a SUBJECTIVE marker for when a decision was made.

And many subjects press the button BEFORE the alleged autonomous "brain decision".

 

[DBT]

The subject presses the chosen button in the instance the decision is felt to be 'consciously made'...

In case you don't understand.

This is a SUBJECTIVE marker for when a decision was made.

And many subjects press the button BEFORE the alleged autonomous "brain decision".

You miss the point. There are two points of interest here, one being when the subject experiences making a conscious decision and pressing the button. The second and most important point, the unconscious information processing activity leading up to the conscious experience of decision making. The evidence supporting that the latter determines the former. In other words, that unconscious information activity prior to conscious experience shapes and forms conscious experience.

That is what you do your utmost best to deny and avoid in order to maintain your unfounded, untenable notion of autonomy of consciousness. You have no evidence, you have no argument, you have no case to argue. It would be better for you if you just conceded gracefully.

And many subjects press the button BEFORE the alleged autonomous "brain decision".

Makes no sense. There is no autonomous consciousness. It is all brain function. Acquiring information via the senses, processing this information and then representing some but not all of this information in conscious form, followed by actions performed, progression of cognitive events.

 

[untermensche]

In case you don't understand.

This is a SUBJECTIVE marker for when a decision was made.

And many subjects press the button BEFORE the alleged autonomous "brain decision".

You miss the point. There are two points of interest here, one being when the subject experiences making a conscious decision and pressing the button. The second and most important point, the unconscious information processing activity leading up to the conscious experience of decision making. The evidence supporting that the latter determines the former. In other words, that unconscious information activity prior to conscious experience shapes and forms conscious experience.

That is what you do your utmost best to deny and avoid in order to maintain your unfounded, untenable notion of autonomy of consciousness. You have no evidence, you have no argument, you have no case to argue. It would be better for you if you just conceded gracefully.

You miss the point.

We don't know what we are doing when we will the arm to move. It is just something we do in our minds.

When exactly our mental activity begins is not necessarily something we have full awareness of.

And many decisions are occurring here at once. One decision to decide when we think we are beginning a decision and another decision to move the hand and push a button.

NOTHING is clear and decisive about any of this.

And many subjects press the button BEFORE the alleged autonomous "brain decision".

Makes no sense. There is no autonomous consciousness. It is all brain function. Acquiring information via the senses, processing this information and then representing some but not all of this information in conscious form, followed by actions performed, progression of cognitive events.

Not more autonomy nonsense!

YOU are claiming brain activity on it's own acts autonomously and makes decisions.

I am claiming consciousness, an aspect of brain activity, does it.

There is NO substantial difference in those positions in terms of autonomy.

Autonomous real world decisions are not explained in either case.

 

[fromderinside]

Mr nobody has finally revealed hisssef. Its untermenche. The scientific community knows because they design experiments based on previous experiments that confirm postulations made by them. DBT knows because he properly reports them here on this thread. The only one who fits the profile of nobody is untermenche because he doesn't understand, doesn't know the meaning of the experiments, the markers of decisions, even the idea of decision, doesn't even know he's writing in his own dualist beliefs since he goes into an endless causal loop - Else why interject things like "on it's own acts autonomously and " every time he tries - as contradiction in every case. It's perfectly adequate to say brain activity is making decisions. I guess untermenche fails to see that the brain is the acting part of the one with which observers say the decision is made.

 

[untermensche]

Mr nobody has finally revealed hisssef. Its untermenche. The scientific community knows because they design experiments based on previous experiments that confirm postulations made by them. DBT knows because he properly reports them here on this thread. The only one who fits the profile of nobody is untermenche because he doesn't understand, doesn't know the meaning of the experiments, the markers of decisions, even the idea of decision, doesn't even know he's writing in his own dualist beliefs since he goes into an endless causal loop - Else why interject things like "on it's own acts autonomously and " every time he tries - as contradiction in every case. It's perfectly adequate to say brain activity is making decisions. I guess untermenche fails to see that the brain is the acting part of the one with which observers say the decision is made.

Do you know the difference between an objective assessment of the timing of an apparent conscious decision and a subjective guess?

It is called the emperor without clothes mentality.

It happens in "science" all the time.

 

[fromderinside]

Mr nobody has finally revealed hisssef. Its untermenche. The scientific community knows because they design experiments based on previous experiments that confirm postulations made by them. DBT knows because he properly reports them here on this thread. The only one who fits the profile of nobody is untermenche because he doesn't understand, doesn't know the meaning of the experiments, the markers of decisions, even the idea of decision, doesn't even know he's writing in his own dualist beliefs since he goes into an endless causal loop - Else why interject things like "on it's own acts autonomously and " every time he tries - as contradiction in every case. It's perfectly adequate to say brain activity is making decisions. I guess untermenche fails to see that the brain is the acting part of the one with which observers say the decision is made.

Do you know the difference between an objective assessment of the timing of an apparent conscious decision and a subjective guess?

It is called the emperor without clothes mentality.

It happens in "science" all the time.

You have the density of lead on this subject. The worst you could have stated was objective versus subjective accessment. Rather you resort to guess because a human uttered it. It was a formally constrained response which is just what psychophysicists do when they access minimum visual. tactile, auditory, odor, vibratory, pain, and pressure sensation. Works well for such as glasses, hearing aides, and the like. Serves as basis for comparison with ideal observer and the like, is used to evaluate airworthiness of tactical and strategic A/C etc.

So, yes, the subjects response is a guess averaged over trails counterbalanced and controlled for time, place, situation and the rest, IOW a subjective assessment.

Since we already compare subjective to objective measures for things we compare the time course of brain activity in likely sites with subjective activity uttered. Your flame throwing just got pissed on and it went out toot sweet.

When you argue with grownups you're likely look like the scientific child you are. Don't despair. If you study one day you'll be a grown up too, However then when you get pissed on you'll really feel it.

 

[untermensche]

It is a pure guess.

An absurd command to make a pure guess.

Then passed off as something objective.

One must be as dumb as a dog to buy it.

 

[fromderinside]

Oh scratch. You just ran in to a door again. You really need to know whether the door is open before you try to enter

 

[untermensche]

Oh scratch. You just ran in to a door again. You really need to know whether the door is open before you try to enter

You are dead wrong here.

Subjects are asked to guess when they think they are just starting to make some mental activity that causes movement.

It is absurdity upon absurdity.

Nothing objective can come from it.

We are talking about milliseconds and human guessing.

A game for clowns.